Roving Sign posted:Sorry - I find the whole notion that we need a systems of authoritative standards - absurd and archaic.
Why do we need this system? Where do we use it? When?
Its just a short hand hack that requires you to refer to some set of predetermined definitions.
The use of these "standards" dates back to when guys used a typewriter and a sheet of paper to keep inventory - and a shorthand code was a handy way to save space on an inventory list. (or memory on old 64K computers!)
Times have changed! We now all have (obviously) computers - with enough memory that we don't pine over how many characters we use.
And - hi-resolution digital cameras - have made the old truism "A picture is worth a thousand words" even more true!
Why not just describe the train using the very excellent ENGLISH language?
Any other system is INFERIOR.
I'm grabbing a train off the shelf - here's my description:
LIONEL ALCO 2023 Union Pacific
Tandem Variation B. Overall condition is very good. Signs of use/play/runtime - but no major scratches. Yellow finish has nice patina. Decals intact. Shells exhibit some - but minimal warping commonly seen in this model. Frame is clean, no corrosion in battery compartment. Wheels and motor move freely. Takes power, but has E-unit issues and won't run. No box.
There isn't much more to say about this loco. A few pictures included will tell the whole story.
Isn't that infinitely preferable to "C-6"? - which is just a generic pigeonhole...with no specifics to this loco.
I do support the referencing of descriptors and classifications created by third parties like Tandem.
Sure, a long written description would be best. Your written description contains multiple subjective terms. What is 'nice patina'? How much warping is minimal? What is a major scratch? And so on.
I can agreed that properly taken, detailed photos are best.
But unfortunately I have ended up with Ebay lots where the flaws weren't apparent to me in the photos. And I don't want to take and keep multiple photos of the trains I have insured. The insurance company accepts my TCA standard condition descriptions.
Every special interest group has its own terminology, and acronymns, which could be thought of as shorthand. I don't see why or how train folks should be different.
